Author Topic: Has anyone gone sub-.040 quench distance?  (Read 2154 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

My427stang

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3929
    • View Profile
Has anyone gone sub-.040 quench distance?
« on: February 15, 2019, 10:44:02 AM »
Cast SCAT crank and I-beam rods, 4032 11 cc dish piston, square decked iron block and heads, 6000 rpm max shift point, no rev limiter. Have not measured how much they rock in the bore, but should be minimal.  Street driven but might take a few runs down the track.

Trying to buy a little compression back, build was planned for a 8554 gasket, but if I go 1020 I can sneak up on compression a little, but quench goes to .036. 

I typically use .040 as a min, but see all kinds of crazy numbers out there, some much tighter than .036, thoughts?
---------------------------------
Ross
Bullock's Power Service, LLC
- 70 Fastback Mustang, 489 cid FE, Victor, SEFI, Erson SFT cam, TKO-600 5 speed, 4.11 9 inch.
- 71 F100 shortbed 4x4, 461 cid FE, headers, Victor Pro-flo EFI, Comp Custom HFT cam, 3.50 9 inch

KMcCullah

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 733
    • View Profile
Re: Has anyone gone sub-.040 quench distance?
« Reply #1 on: February 15, 2019, 11:08:38 AM »
.036 quench is what my 416 has. Silv-O-lites .016 in the hole with .020 steel shim head gaskets. It runs great. But with as much rock as the pistons have, I'd be nervous with less quench.

http://fepower.net/simplemachinesforum/index.php?topic=4509.msg47481#msg47481

Edit: Just a thought here, Ross. I think some cheap compression could be had by getting away from the 1020 gasket. It's got pretty big fire rings. A nice fitting Cometic would be good for half a point I'd bet.
« Last Edit: February 15, 2019, 12:28:30 PM by KMcCullah »
Kevin McCullah


C6AE

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 167
    • View Profile
Re: Has anyone gone sub-.040 quench distance?
« Reply #2 on: February 15, 2019, 12:54:33 PM »
I can tell you that it's not too bad, it sounds exactly like a rod knock *except it occurs when you let off the gas. 



Joe-JDC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1490
  • Truth stands on its own merit.
    • View Profile
Re: Has anyone gone sub-.040 quench distance?
« Reply #3 on: February 15, 2019, 01:37:00 PM »
I have personally pulled FE apart with .038" quench, and there were witness marks on the tops of the pistons and there was no carbon where the flat portion of the pistons had touched the heads.  Steel rods used to come with a warning to require a minimum of .050" on the clearance.  Aluminum rods required more because they grow more when hot.  Experienced FE racers used to say set the quench at .039", and timing at 41*, and drive it like you stole it.   Joe-JDC
Joe-JDC '70GT-500

Tommy-T

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 313
    • View Profile
Re: Has anyone gone sub-.040 quench distance?
« Reply #4 on: February 16, 2019, 12:11:53 AM »
When there's a mirror image ".030" on the quench pad of the head matching the ".030" on the piston top...it's just right. The slugs stay REALLY clean!

Seriously, I've run a Badger rebuilder piston .010 out'a the hole on a long rod (352/360 rod) 390 with normal rebuilder Felpro blue head gaskets. Low rpm deal, no troubles.

bluef100fe

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 241
    • View Profile
Re: Has anyone gone sub-.040 quench distance?
« Reply #5 on: February 17, 2019, 03:25:32 PM »
I’ve run 0.036 before. Pistons were nice and clean around the quench pad. What skirt clearance are you setting the pistons/block up for? 4032 alloy I believe can be run tighter than the old TrW’s I was using. If that’s the case then you should have less piston rock than I did. I don’t see a problem, I’ve heard of guys running tighter than this with steel rods and tight skirt clearances but 0.036 is as far as I’ve pushed it. Assuming your bore size is in the 4.08ish area... bigger the bore,shorter skirt, and longer the stroke might need a little more room. Good luck with the build.


<a href="https://servimg.com/view/14375057/64" target="_blank" ><img  src="https://i58.servimg.com/u/f58/14/37/50/57/img_2013.jpg" border="0" alt="Image hosted by servimg.com" /></a>

Cody Ladowski
1976 F-100 stepside
390 C6 9 inch
1.56 sixty ft.
7.38 @ 91.5
11.79 @ 111.5

machoneman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3853
    • View Profile
Re: Has anyone gone sub-.040 quench distance?
« Reply #6 on: February 17, 2019, 06:47:09 PM »
If street driven as you say with only a few track runs, stick with .040 or so and sleep well!
Bob Maag